I'm with Jason on this one. I think asking people to change their file names to ensure deploy order is ludicrous. As I recall, the unix sysv numbering is all on symlinks, not the scripts/whatever themselves.
david jencks On 2002.03.14 18:18:46 -0500 Jason Dillon wrote: > > > > > >deploy1/2/3 zero votes > >000-999mywathever.xar:11 votes > >deploy.order: 9 votes > > > >some just don't give a hoot > > > >ok the deploy.order was a good idea given by a sweedish guy sitting at > the > >back of the class, it goes like this, put a deploy.order that specifies > the > >order in which you deploy the files, it means that you put for example > ><deploy-order> > >the-first-file.xar > >the-second-file.xar > ></deploy-order> > > > > This is the same as explicitly listing your deployment urls... which if > you don't specify a file:// directory url the order is as you list it. > It is only when listing from a directory which causes this > dependency/order problem. > > >I kind of liked it, since it means you can put additional information, > but > >sacha pointed out you can also put a order.readme file and be done with > >this, with the drawbacks that you could actually mess up the names > easily > >(bound to happen) and that you needed multiple deploy.order files to get > at > >the same result if you went for dynamic deployments. > > > >so the 000-999.xar idea is the one, if someone wants to do it go > ahead.... > > > > I still think this is a really bad idea. > > We have a half functional dependency system... so rather than fix is, we > artificially force users to number there deployments, or staticly list > the urls to deploy. > > How does that make the JBoss deployment system easy? One of the big > features of JBoss is easy deployment... which this just basically tosses > out the window. The instructions for deployment go from : > > "copy to deploy/" > > to > > "copy to deploy/, make sure that the file name is prefixed with a number > such that it is larger than all dependency deployments and lower than > other deployments which depend on it. If you are not sure what the > dependencys are then trial and error... or go look through each > deplopment descriptor and...". > > Why not just put the simple sorting bits back in UDS until the > dependency issue can be resolved? > > --jason > > > > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > > _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
